But only if &amp; when the wind blows

Originally posted by Rob79: ↑

Hi Acorn,

I think storage complicates things and detracts from the cause of the problem. Curtailment solves the problem and until there is a clear and fair curtailment policy things will get worse. For example say a renewable target is 30% then logically at any point in the day we should be targeting 30% renewable output. If we did that then the new generators would be placed where they minimise the curtailment and this would be efficient.

That is not what is happening, we have concentrated Wind and Solar in the lazy areas to reduce build cost for quick wins and the consequence will be high curtailment if we keep doing the same thing. We go 60% sometimes 10% another and call it an average of 35% and move on. That is one of the reasons why we have problems and our bills are going up imo.

In our NEM we have plenty installed capacity now to make this work and bed down the network and so everyone is happy. New generation can be added where there are no renewables in places that have the best weather conditions. Australia could be a leader in efficient Grid development but it means slowing things down and doing the hard work in analysis.

Storage becomes viable when the curtailment gets too high however if you look at the Grid now we are reducing the hydro in the middle of the day or when there is high wind and using that Hydo as storage. The Vic coal is kept constant and the BassLink transmission used. There is no need for additional storage because the hydro is already built. The hydro then acts to balance load shifts. I think this is clever.

The problem with curtailment is it reduces the capacity factor and that increases the cost. It doesn't matter if the install cost is lower because if the factor decreases the cost/MWh increases. Same with storing electricity, at least 15% of output is consumed in the storage process and that generation loss has to be recovered. In South Australia they are already have enough capacity so any new capacity will result in high curtailment, it is no wonder the Thermal didn't progress and that had storage.

PS. I you disagree it's fine. I have an opinion and that's all it is.
Cheers

Expand

Wouldn't we be better with 85% storage gain as opposed to a 100% curtailment loss ?

Localised storage would add some cost but if that means the end of very high peak prices then that cost could be easily paid for. Hydro is great for maintaining the balance but in a dry country like ours I wouldn't mind freeing up some of that water for other things going forward.
Think decades ahead, not years.

Local storage would actually offset some of the transmission losses from big hydro as well.

You make a good point about excessive renewable generation in some areas but that is simply a policy and management issue. Hopefully after the federal election we will see much more progress in that area.

Have you seen the 'Faraday Grid' thread in the politics forum ? I reckon you might find it interesting.